Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce Tammen


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR applies. ✗ plicit  05:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Bruce Tammen

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

There is no notabilty for wikipedia --ZemanZorg (talk) 09:13, 14 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TigerShark (talk) 02:18, 22 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:26, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - besides what's already in the article, this recent article appears to strengthen the case for continuing significant coverage. Chicago Classical Review has been around for over 12 years, and the credentials of its writers and editors bolster the case that it's a reliable source when writing about a conductor. Wes sideman (talk) 14:35, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.